The Down Range Forum

Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: tombogan03884 on June 07, 2008, 12:28:24 AM

Title: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 07, 2008, 12:28:24 AM
I've heard that "Hunters" aren't as concerned with things like assault weapon bans as long as no one messes with thier "hunting guns" and that "Shooters aren't as concerned with things like, PETA scaring game away from hunting areas as long as they don't mess with ranges and semi auto's.
What do YOU say ?
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Hazcat on June 07, 2008, 12:37:18 AM
I am having a problem at my club.  It is mostly made up of old farts and FUDDS.  The current rule is one round for guests and three rounds for members (not including handguns or rim fire rifles).

We have a survey going on to change this  to either 5 or 10 for members or take it back to one for every one.  The FUDDS and old farts are all for taking it back to one.  If this happens I will leave the club.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 07, 2008, 12:53:54 AM
Why are they doing that ????
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Hazcat on June 07, 2008, 01:36:06 AM
Why are they doing that ????

Because their FUDDS not shooters.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: TAB on June 07, 2008, 03:00:26 AM
Because their FUDDS not shooters.


they still need to practice a quick fallow up shot...


I know, I know... they never miss...   just like every time I shoot  clays, They always break... some times I do the breaking...
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: jnevis on June 07, 2008, 07:24:03 AM
I'd like to learn to hunt but just don't have a lot of time too.  My neighbor is willing to take the oldest and I duck/deer hunting but it just hasn't happened yet.

I do spend a lot of time shooting IDPA and USPSA when an hour or two presents itself.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: 2HOW on June 07, 2008, 09:40:41 AM
Im not a hunter, but I understand that its part of a heritage, especially here in Tennessee and have no problem with hunters. I dont see the sport in most of it unless your hunting boar or bear with a handgun. I condem those who hunt for sport and not for meat. Some kill deer for the tenderloin and leave the rest laying to rot and thats just wrong, some like trophies and thats kind of weird IMO, but as long as the meat is harvested, what ever.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: jc451911 on June 07, 2008, 10:36:39 AM
I'm primarily a shooter, but I'll shoot nearly all of the local wildlife as it presents itself. Gotta keep the critters out of the garden! ;D
We as a group had better take notice of the other's problems though, or we'll all pay! B. Hussein wants your M700 and my AK.

Can't have the masses clinging to those nasty assault and sniper rifles.  They'll go after God if he gets elected! >:(
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 07, 2008, 11:06:59 AM
I'll voice my opinion as well now. I used to hunt, but I saw so little game that I gave it up. I'd rather see the animals than carry them out of the woods (kind of lazy as well ;D  ) I'm single and working, I'm not going to eat that much meat and when I want some I can buy it,, I'd just as soon leave it for people who need it. I have no problem with people who do hunt as long as SOME ONE is going to eat the meat
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Bill Stryker on June 07, 2008, 11:21:50 AM
So, what about crows, rats, coyotes and other vermin? I think it is ok to shoot them and not eat them. It can also be great fun and is hunting.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 07, 2008, 11:51:24 AM
So, what about crows, rats, coyotes and other vermin? I think it is ok to shoot them and not eat them. It can also be great fun and is hunting.

Is that "hunting" or house cleaning / Home defense. I used to like going to the brickyard or dump and shooting rats. I never lived in an area that was Primarily farm country, so not really concerned with crows and coyotes or prarie dogs. But, if I ever get out your way my attitude is subject to change. ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: dj454 on June 07, 2008, 12:27:43 PM
I grew up in the North Carolina mountains and grew up hunting white tail, turkey,squirrel,and rabbit. I miss hunting sometimes I just don't have the time or even a place to hunt anymore. I moved further downstate and I just don't know as many people to find a place to hunt and I don't own any land to hunt on. I am concerned for hunters and shooters rights. I would like to be a hunter again but I am always a shooter first.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Michael Bane on June 07, 2008, 12:33:03 PM
You guys know this is a subject that has been on my front burner for years, right?

I stopped hunting a long time ago, largely because I have the attention span of an 8 year-old...made me a good IPSC shooter and a miserable person in a tree stand. Hunting and shooting are, in fact, two sides of the same coin. My gripe was that hunting was the giganto senior partner, to the virtual exclusion of the shooting sports side of the coin.

Several things have happened to change that perception:

• Eventually, people in the industry started listening to me and other voices, like Paul Erhardt, Jim Shepherd, Tom Taylor at S&W, Steve Sanetti and Ken Jorgensen at Ruger, Paul Januzzo (formerly) at Glock, etc. When I keynoted the last huge hunting enclave several years ago — the guy who was there to tell people what they didn't want to hear — my comments were met with stony silence.  I said the truth — deal with us, work with us, because we're half the market and we pay 75% of the excise taxes that state fish and game run on...I said taxation without representation is STILL tyranny...one of the reps from a huge hunting accessories company pigeonholed me after the talk..."Good work, jerk," he said, although he used a stronger word than "jerk." "You're single-handedly going to tear this industry to pieces." At the upcoming NSSF Shooting Sports Summit in a couple of weeks, the list of speakers has totally changed...me, Erhardt, Shepherd, Sanetti (now head of NSSF), etc.

Even more importantly, for the first time we have a definitive study that totally backs up everything we've been saying...the (as yet unreleased) omnibus NSSF study on hunting and shooting trends in the United States. It's scary negative, but here's the key stat...of the overall market:

Quote
• 43% define themselves as primarily hunting
• 43% define themselves as primarily shooters
• 14% do both

EQUAL MARKETS, as we've been saying for the better part of a decade!

• The Zumbo Effect...no other single event had the profound effect on the industry as the slagging of Jim Zumbo. Jim made his ill-thought-out remarks on a Friday afternoon; by Sunday evening the entire firearms industry understood who was now driving the machine. I've told Jim to his face that I was sorry for the role I had to play, but that it had to be done! We could not continue, much less go into another election cycle, with everyone, including Congress, acting like "hunting" and "shooting" were synonymous, so all anybody needed to do to suck up to us was conserve some wetlands and talk about ducks!

• The ascendency of the AR-15 platform as the most popular rifle on earth...when I first started talking about the size and depth of the black rifle market 3 or 4 years ago, I was flatly told by "industry experts" that I was crazy. This numbers are now accepted as the baseline (and 2008 sales, driven by Obama, are at levels that are already breath-taking even to me). OUTDOOR LIFE magazine considers my 6-page article on ARs (http://www.outdoorlife.com/article.jsp?ID=21010945) in the field a year or so ago to be one of the single most important articles they've ever published, and it laid to rest the naysayers.

• The rise of industry "heroes," like the inestimable Ronnie Barrett, who showed everyone what "standing up" looked like, and people like the aforementioned Sanetti, Taylor, Jorgensen, Bob Morrison at Taurus, former NSSF head Doug Painter and NSSF legal expert Larry Keene, former NRA Prez Sandy Froman and new Prez John Siglar and many others, who understood and understand that the world is changing and were willing to put the gun culture first.

I've said this before, we go into the most important elections of our lives more united than we've ever been before. We on the shooting side need to reach out to the hunting side...there is still some awkwardness, but nothing we can't overcome.

Make no mistake about it...the gun culture is going to war. The Democrats have given in to their basest instincts and given us a candidate who, all hyperbole aside, will if he gets the power take our guns — all our guns! — and gut the Second Amendment, a man who holds what we believe in to the core of our beings in utter contempt.

I watched Bob Barr on Glenn Beck last night. Bob is a man I've met, a man I hugely respect, a warrior, a man who has a spot-on analysis of America at this juncture...and a man I will not vote for this November! If te Dems had run one of their "political whore" candidates, maybe even the lovely and talented Hillary Clinton, I might have opted to vote Libertarian, where my heart is, rather than for a man I particularly dislike who champions a morally and ethically bankrupt political party of weasels and morons.

But that's not what the Dems have done...they've played the scary card.

And as is typical, we as a voting block are invisible. Ever wonder why the MSM never seems to mention guns as a major battleground? Because they totally understand, as do the Dems, that the more invisible we are, the easier we are to step on after the election. Is there anybody here who doesn't believe that an Obama as President with a huge majority Democratic House and Senate won't do exactly what he says he will do and ram through a new — and permanent — AWB? Ammo controls like microstamping? "Smart gun" initiatives and restrictions on "unsafe" guns? Closing public lands to shooting? Lots and lots of "reasonable" gun laws...

Okay, rant mode off...remember, my job is to be strident, because so many in our culture aren't.

Michael B

Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Ron J on June 07, 2008, 01:22:56 PM
Shooters and hunters need only to look across the “pond” to see what will happen if WE do not unite to defeat the Democrats this November.  Marshal’ette’s excellent post on the RKBA forum is a good example of this. 

http://transsylvaniaphoenix.blogspot.com/2008/05/british-called-they-want-their-guns.html

Bottom line, if you like a boom stick of any kind … may it be a M1A or a Sako bolt gun, a Beretta O/U or a Mossberg 590; your future of pressing the trigger is at risk if Barack Hussein Obama is elected. 

There is too much at risk this November.   This is my point from my rant on another thread.  We need to orchestrate and execute a marketing campaign that illustrates what will happen to ANY one who enjoys ANY shooting sport if B-HO is elected. 

Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 07, 2008, 02:50:03 PM

Okay, rant mode off...remember, my job is to be strident, because so many in our culture aren't.

Michael B


Rant away MB, You get your facts and say what you beleive without BS. It's why we support you and your shows.
Got to admit, despite what I've said in some of the threads, the more I hear about Obama the better McCain looks.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: ericire12 on June 07, 2008, 04:16:47 PM
So, what about crows, rats, coyotes and other vermin? I think it is ok to shoot them and not eat them. It can also be great fun and is hunting.

Technically pest control.... or maybe extermination. Most varmint hunting is done for controlling species so that they don't interfere with using the land to make a living. I guess if it is 100% recreational, then it would be called hunting.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Ron J on June 07, 2008, 05:11:44 PM

Rant away MB, You get your facts and say what you beleive without BS. It's why we support you and your shows.
Got to admit, despite what I've said in some of the threads, the more I hear about Obama the better McCain looks.



You are wise beyond your years ... or is it ears?   ;)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: ericire12 on June 07, 2008, 07:24:24 PM
Is there anybody here who doesn't believe that an Obama as President with a huge majority Democratic House and Senate won't do exactly what he says he will do and ram through a new — and permanent — AWB? Ammo controls like microstamping? "Smart gun" initiatives and restrictions on "unsafe" guns? Closing public lands to shooting? Lots and lots of "reasonable" gun laws...


Michael B



More importantly then "what he says he will do", it is what he has done. These are not just words with him. He has the liberal voting record to back it up. Many candidates (Obama included) often will say anything to get elected. This is why you must look at past voting records to see what they are really about. With Obama, its not just a stump speech. He has the track record to prove that he is serious about raping our 2nd amendment rights.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Rastus on June 07, 2008, 07:48:50 PM
I'll voice my opinion as well now. I used to hunt, but I saw so little game that I gave it up. I'd rather see the animals than carry them out of the woods (kind of lazy as well ;D  ) .........

Yeah, yeah, yeah....blame it on a lack of game.  We know what it really is.  :D  ;D  :o

MB...musta' had your Wheaties this mornin', eh?   

It's a while to the conventions....maybe things will change.  Not that we want to do anything less to mobilize the vote. 

Remember when the weasels call asking a politicla survey take it and then break their Karma by saying, "No....I want to talk about guns.  I am not going to answer any questions until we talk about guns.  Period."  It would take amazingly few people in any single national survey (5-15)  to throw a campaign into a panic.  They want their questions answered and if a statistically significant group refused to answer for a solitary reason it will be reported and send shivers up and down the chain of political bovine scatology.   Don't forget guys....tell them to kiss your rear ends about anything but guns if they call.  Deal?
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Rastus on June 07, 2008, 07:59:56 PM
I meant to say take the call for the political survey....don't take the survey!!!

Bovine Scatology...did I steal that from someone on this board?
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Neon Knight Anubis on June 07, 2008, 08:42:04 PM
I put both and while I haven't been hunting in a long time I'm going to start again when I get back because of one primary reason: I really don't like beef. I wish I enjoyed deer hunting as much as my dad does but in my case its more out of necessity than enjoyment; varmint hunting on the other hand can be a blast.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: JohnJacobH on June 07, 2008, 08:44:56 PM

14 % do both


14 % huh? Fudds to the left of me, "tacticians" to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle again!!!

Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Rastus on June 07, 2008, 10:58:25 PM
14 % huh? Fudds to the left of me, "tacticians" to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle again!!!


Swipe a clip from Stealers Wheel, eh?  Besides being "stuck in the middle again"...being in that 14% heralds you as being a person who is ambidangerous.  Skills that compliment each other would be most valueable in a TEOTWAWKI (spelling?) situation.  Cunning plus technical training.....
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: ccd on June 07, 2008, 11:45:08 PM
  I used to hunt but just shoot now. Most of that is because as MB points out nonhunters pay 75% of the taxes for hunters. Here in Texas the legislature "borrows" probably 60% of these "wildlife" funds and diverts it into the general revenue fund. It is doing nothing but creating a smaller and smaller pool of people who hunt and fish or shoot. Our population has more than doubled(almost tripled) in the time that I have lived here but the size of the hunting and fishing population has remained the same or gotten a little smaller, which is not a good demographic trend.
  When I was in the military it was a breath of fresh air to find public shooting ranges on USFS lands in other states where they actually encouraged people to shoot. This state ( specifically the Legislature) wants lots of money for providing nothing in return (HELL even in CA there were county operated shooting ranges!). There is no thinking of investing the money back to encourage long term interest in hunting and shooting, or even in encouraging new shooters or hunters, which would result in greater long term revenues fior the state. Making matters worse a few of the Club ranges that were around here have had to close due to development and the resulting OBSCENE property values, noise complaints,etc. Now most of the times I go to the closest range to "just shoot" it is so crowded it is almost always a negative experience that does nothing to draw new shooters to our ranks.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Marshal Halloway on June 08, 2008, 12:08:19 AM
Just a comparison from my old country, Norway.

These are stats I collected in 2005 for the Norwegian Justice Department:

Population: 4.5 million

Norway has a land area of 324220 square kilometers (125182 square miles), making it slightly larger than New Mexico.

As of April 2001 the population owned 1.5 million firearms, 23% of the firearms are handguns.
990,000 of the firearms are registered by 446,000 gun owners.

As of April 2003, 337,000 Norwegians are registered hunters.
Over 225,000 Norwegians are shooters and members of 10 national shooting organizations.

Harvested in 2003
Moose 38,000
Elk 25,000
Reindeer 4,500
Small Game: 830,000

Norway has over 850 outdoor shooting ranges used by military forces and the members of hunting and shooting organizations.

80 % Norwegian shooters are also hunters !

Over the last 20 years, gun ownership and number of shooters have increased year by year. The same goes for the group of gun owners who both shoot and hunt.

Why?

Shooting and hunting organizations are cooperating on many levels (hunter education, shooting programs especially for hunters and sharing of shooting ranges). Have in mind that hunters in Norway have to pass an annual shooting test before the big game season, forcing them to go to the shooting range at least five times a year. This regulation was a door opener for shooting organizations to recruit new shooters. For the hunters, becoming familiar with the shooting sports, they found a great way to prolong the hunting season by adding paper and steel targets to their "trophy hunt". Sports shooting also became an alternative because of the increased cost of hunting.

I strongly believe US will follow in the same trend, not because of the same type of regulations as mentioned above, but due to the fact that hunting will become less accessible for the average wallet.

Norwegian shooting ranges have room for all firearms owners. Big question regarding the US is this: Is there enough shooting ranges to accommodate a larger number of shooters?

Is there enough willpower among the shooting and hunting organizations to fight for common goals?
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Neon Knight Anubis on June 08, 2008, 12:37:31 AM
One for all, all for one!

I know its a cliche but really its the only thing thats going to get us anywhere, we do not have the luxury of acting on our own. Be it the left wingers in both parties or the UN, we have to stand our ground.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: twyacht on June 08, 2008, 05:59:09 AM
Thanks Marshall, I didn't know the stats on Norway, glad to see they didn't go the UK or mainland European "Disarm the populus" way.

Plus, really,really really, cold winters, need good elk and reindeer steaks! ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: ericire12 on June 08, 2008, 08:25:41 AM
14 % huh? Fudds to the left of me, "tacticians" to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle again!!!



Lets not start bashing us hunters....... when the shit hits the fan (AKA Obama becomes president) and our whole way of life collapses, you will be looking to us to provide your venison! 8)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: gunman1911 on June 08, 2008, 09:08:53 AM
I like to pull the trigger a lot when I go to the range and practice my drills and then get down to some serious 200+ yard target hitting with my .44 Super Redhawk and then I usually go to my AR for farther distance so I can stay sharp  for the coyotes. then I go to the Ruger MkII for a fun session so I can keep blasting those pesky red squirrels. Come fall  ( the way prices are ) I go out and get a deer or two to tide my family over . I would also  like to take the time to thank MB for all he is doing for us shoots and our sports no matter what they be.. Tom this was a damm good post.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 08, 2008, 10:45:16 AM
I like to pull the trigger a lot when I go to the range and practice my drills and then get down to some serious 200+ yard target hitting with my .44 Super Redhawk and then I usually go to my AR for farther distance so I can stay sharp  for the coyotes. then I go to the Ruger MkII for a fun session so I can keep blasting those pesky red squirrels. Come fall  ( the way prices are ) I go out and get a deer or two to tide my family over . I would also  like to take the time to thank MB for all he is doing for us shoots and our sports no matter what they be.. Tom this was a damm good post.

Thanks, Let's all remember that not only do shooters and hunters need to work together to protect our gun rights but if we lose, we need the hunters to help us shooters with our stalking techniques.  ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Marshal Halloway on June 08, 2008, 11:52:00 AM
Thanks Marshall, I didn't know the stats on Norway, glad to see they didn't go the UK or mainland European "Disarm the populus" way.
Plus, really,really really, cold winters, need good elk and reindeer steaks! ;D

When I talk to fellow gun owners in the US, they are for the most part very surprised when they learn about the stats from Norway.
"Common belief" is that Europe as a whole has very strict gun laws and England has become the role model. That's not the case. My home country is still unattached to the European Union and has the highest rate of gun ownership in Western Europe, yet possesses the lowest murder rate. (Reference: Harvard Study Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy - Title: "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence.")

Hunter and shooting organizations in my country represent one of the largest interest groups and provide a significant pressure against the anti-gun political agendas. Hunters and shooters are united in many areas and have for the most part succeeded in maintaining and keeping the long traditions and cultures within shooting and hunting.

The largest shooting organization in Norway is The National Rifle Association of Norway instituted by the Parliament in 1893, and consists today of 900 rifleclubs with 160 000 active shooters. The Constitution was, and has since been, as follows:"The National Rifle Association's goal is to promote marksmanship throughout the Norwegian population and thus prepare the population for National Defense".

The organization receives support from the Government for its activities through the annual Defense Budget. DFS and the Rifle Clubs cooperate closely with the Home Guard regarding training of marksmen and education of instructors. The organization arranges every year a national competition gathering about 5000 competitors. The Armed Forces play a vital support function in this annual event. Competitions are normally conducted with big-bore rifles caliber 6,5 or 7,62 mm. In the summer season the competitions are performed on rifle ranges at distances from 100 meters up to 300 meters, while during the winter season competitions are organized outdoors on targets from 100 up to 600 meters.

The National Rifle Association is also conducting a widespread recruiting effort to engage new members into its organization. About 20 000 of its members are between 12 and 18 year of age.The clubs are also heavily engaged in the training of hunters to become better marksmen. About 70 000 hunters pass the compulsory annual test, organized by the National Rifle Association Clubs, before they are licensed to hunt big game like Moose, Reindeer and Deer.

Back to topic:

I worked for several years as an "activist" to unite hunters and shooters. There is still some distance between what I call "riflemen and handgunners, but for the most part, they are now more united than ever.
They key thing when it comes to the hunters vs shooters is how we structure the organizations and how we can agree on working towards common goals. However, if the umbrella organizations don't agree, the grass root will simply follow suit and the topic Hunters vs. shooters will remain the same. Gun owners no matter their primary activity vs the anti-gun movement is the real topic.



Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: 2HOW on June 08, 2008, 11:55:38 AM
Thanks, Let's all remember that not only do shooters and hunters need to work together to protect our gun rights but if we lose, we need the hunters to help us shooters with our stalking techniques.  ;D
 Oh I got that down pat .  1st you throw smoke, when they hunker down and see its just smoke they come out, then you drop white phosphorous on them and when they drop to the ground writhing in pain you hit em with the HE.  Oh !! Wrong technique  ::)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: MikeBjerum on June 08, 2008, 12:59:45 PM
I hunt because I enjoy sitting in the outdoors watching animals, plus if you sit in a tree and watch critters you a nut, but if you do it with a bow or gun in your hand your cool  8)

I shoot USPSA, because I enjoy running with guns (my mom wouldn't let me run with scissors).

I shoot rifle of all calibers in competition because I like the challenge and it makes me a better hunter (one shot one kill is as close as I can come to making PETA happy, and I'm too fat and outta shape to track an animal more than fifteen feet).

When arguing gun rights I like to keep in mind that we have the right to keep and bear arms for protection of the Republic - necessarily for hunting.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 08, 2008, 01:45:22 PM
 Oh I got that down pat .  1st you throw smoke, when they hunker down and see its just smoke they come out, then you drop white phosphorous on them and when they drop to the ground writhing in pain you hit em with the HE.  Oh !! Wrong technique  ::)

Are you NAVY ? Let me clue you in, what works well with a 16 inch NAVAL rifle isn't quite as effective with any thing less than 40mm   ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 08, 2008, 01:52:09 PM
Marshal, 600 meter INDOOR range, SWEET !  Norway probably still has enough people who remember the German occupation and the Cold war to keep alive the idea of "Home guard". America, insulated by 2 oceans has not been reminded of that need in the last 65 years. We forget that the primary reason the Japanese never considered landings on the mainland was the proliferation of private fire arms. You have much usefull experiance to share if we can get the darn Sheeple to listen.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: TStorm on June 08, 2008, 02:52:54 PM
2A is about the right to own and bear arms, not what you (legally) do with them.  The end.  The basis for hunting with a firearm starts there.  There is no Constitutional right to hunt, be it with a firearm, a bow, knife or your bare hands.  Everyone needs to understand this.  It lands cold, but its the truth.

I'm "re"new to shooting in the past two years.  I have been out of the sport for about twenty years.  I've been a regular IDPA shooter recently and shoot sporting clays/skeet/5 stand on occassion.  I tag-along on hunts when I can swing an invite.  I picked both on this survey since I started purchasing an inclusive fishing and hunting liicense last year, just in case  :). 

I make it clear to all the hunters I know that I'd like to give their particular fetish (deer, ducks, dove, turkey) a try.  Most understand there is a dwindling pool of hunters and want to share their sport as well.  I've been fortunate to have been invited on several hunts, but so far, all I've been able to do is borrow and sight-in a few different rifles :).  Even though I've only seen bupkis on my few trips out to my friend's and coworker's stands, I have had a good time.  Success and interest in huntng is indeed dependent on the time you have to devote, which is becoming harder and harder to find in the world we live in today.

I appreciate the fact that hunters and fees associated with licensing, tags, etc., form the core of the major conservation efforts across the country.  Not PETA conservation, but true, healthy, realistic, population-based conservation ala Teddy Roosevelt.

At the same time, I invite hunters to pistol events, engage them in conversations where shooters are shooters, only the targets are different.  The groups need to stay together.


Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: charliefarmerboy33 on June 08, 2008, 03:37:51 PM
I am a Hunter and a Shooter.
For me hunting is less of a hobby and more of a state of being. I hunt to feed my family. I hunt to participate in the natural order of earth, taking my place in the food chain. I believe the role some creatures play is to provide food for other creatures. I rarely hang trophies on the wall. I will not stand in judgment of those who do. My trophy room is a deep freezer on the back porch. I do admit to enjoying the camaraderie of the Duck Blind.
I am also a shooter.
It is my responsibility as a gun owner to know how to use my firearms well and responsibly.  As a husband and father it is my responsibility to protect my home and my family. I MUST shoot to remain proficient. The fact that it is a lot of fun doesn't hurt. The second amendment has never been about hunting.  Its undeniable intent is for individuals to protect their homes and families from dangerous intruders, to help protect our country from foreign invasion, and GOD HELP US, to protect ourselves from our own government. I reload for economy and because it is enjoyable. I even cast may own bullets, again, because of economy and it is fun. 
Simply put we are all gun owners for what ever reason. We are all gun owners under the same threat to our rights. If we are responsible gun owners we will be One come November.

Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Teresa Heilevang on June 08, 2008, 04:11:28 PM
I hunt and shoot also. The game population is down, so hunting (like we used to do ) is on the downside... but I still enjoy it and I use all the meat so it is a double bonus.

I shoot. Not real competitively..but I sure like plinking when I can.  :)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Marshal Halloway on June 08, 2008, 04:20:58 PM
Marshal, 600 meter INDOOR range, SWEET !  Norway probably still has enough people who remember the German occupation and the Cold war to keep alive the idea of "Home guard". America, insulated by 2 oceans has not been reminded of that need in the last 65 years. We forget that the primary reason the Japanese never considered landings on the mainland was the proliferation of private fire arms. You have much usefull experiance to share if we can get the darn Sheeple to listen.

It is an outdoor range. Some of the military ranges are open to civilian use in the winter time. Deep snow doesn't stop a Norwegian from shootin'.

Most indoor ranges (I believe the number is close to 800) are max 25 meters, a few have 50 meters.

And you're right. The Home Guard after WWII has been a major influence for the shooting sports in Norway and still is.
In the 1930s defense was cut down to almost nothing but they sure learned a lesson when Hitler did the unthinkable.

Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 08, 2008, 05:36:53 PM
It is an outdoor range. Some of the military ranges are open to civilian use in the winter time. Deep snow doesn't stop a Norwegian from shootin'.

Most indoor ranges (I believe the number is close to 800) are max 25 meters, a few have 50 meters.

And you're right. The Home Guard after WWII has been a major influence for the shooting sports in Norway and still is.
In the 1930s defense was cut down to almost nothing but they sure learned a lesson when Hitler did the unthinkable.



It seems that most of the US population will not understand that until some one has their boot on OUR necks saying do it our way or die. Even then some STILL won't get it   :(
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: JohnJacobH on June 08, 2008, 10:06:44 PM
The game population is down, so hunting (like we used to do ) is on the downside


The game population is DOWN???

 Where the heck do you live? 

We got Bambi attacking cars, Mama Bear wandering through the middle of the city with her cubs, rabbits that have to be shooed away from the car door so we can drive to work, squirrels committing suicide everyday in front of cars pulling out of their driveways.

 If you leave the dogs out about 3 or 4 AM they all get riled up by some raccoon or fox or coyote or possum running around in the culverts. 

Naturally, it is ILLEGAL to discharge a weapon inside city limits.  I did take out a bat hanging from the carport in plain view under odd circumstances with my handy dandy air rifle but I didn't exactly broadcast it to the neighbors before or after.

The tide is turning (slowly) since they just declared an "urban hunting season" to thin the Bambi population (for those cities who
REQUEST it)  But sometimes it takes a full blown Apocalypse to get some of the ruling Bolsheviks to see reason.

Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Teresa Heilevang on June 08, 2008, 10:23:16 PM
I live in the middle of the Flint Hills in south east Kansas.( that would be the part of Kansas where there are rivers and woods .) .in other words ..NOT western Kansas.. but the pretty part.
I'm not talking about deer or varmints.. We have a million of those dang coyotes.. and the deer are thick.( and we have trophy sized whitetail ) ..but we have no bear in these parts though  :)
But I was actually referring to birds..  like quail..and prairie chicken is about nil. .. and our rabbit population is very low. ( cause the KF&G put a protection on the stupid hawks..) soooo we have a hawk on every fence post and the rabbit and quail have been their food source.

( DON'T get me started on the Fish and Game..) >:(

We have plenty of deer and squirrel and our dove hunt is wonderful . But the other critters are hurting in their numbers.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Middle Man on June 09, 2008, 09:42:24 AM
Personally, I'm 99.5% in the shooter category.  I take the rare hunting opportunities that come my way.  However, the scarcity of multiple resources prevents any serious pursuit of hunting for myself. 

In my eight years in the firearms industry, I've witnessed the dramatic downturn in "hunting" related firearms and a vast expansion of handguns, AR's, et al.  Hunting firearms and related ammo and soft goods represent a dwindling percentage of overall sales.  There exists a vast amounts of potential factors that have contributed to the changing trends.   
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: 2HOW on June 09, 2008, 05:53:49 PM
Are you NAVY ? Let me clue you in, what works well with a 16 inch NAVAL rifle isn't quite as effective with any thing less than 40mm   ;D
  No Tom 155 howitzer, works great when their dug in.  ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Hazcat on June 09, 2008, 05:57:03 PM
  No Tom 155 howitzer, works great when their dug in.  ;D

Outgoing!! ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: JohnJacobH on June 09, 2008, 09:09:06 PM

But I was actually referring to birds..  like quail..and prairie chicken is about nil. .. and our rabbit population is very low. ( cause the KF&G put a protection on the stupid hawks..) soooo we have a hawk on every fence post and the rabbit and quail have been their food source.

( DON'T get me started on the Fish and Game..) >:(

We have plenty of deer and squirrel and our dove hunt is wonderful . But the other critters are hurting in their numbers.

Before you blame  Hawks  blame Smokey the Bear (that ridiculous infantilization of a dangerous land mammal with a campaign  hat and park ranger pants) and his stupid fire suppression policies. 

Praires need grass fires and when grass fires were common they were not dangerous and greatly benefited the native grasses and plants.

One of these links might help you out:

http://www.qu.org/quis2/State_Site.cfm?State_ID=16&Chapter_ID=0 (http://www.qu.org/quis2/State_Site.cfm?State_ID=16&Chapter_ID=0)

http://www.qu.org/quis2/Chapter_Site.cfm?Chapter_ID=103&State_ID=0 (http://www.qu.org/quis2/Chapter_Site.cfm?Chapter_ID=103&State_ID=0)

http://www.qu.org/quis2/Chapter_Site.cfm?Chapter_ID=102&State_ID=0 (http://www.qu.org/quis2/Chapter_Site.cfm?Chapter_ID=102&State_ID=0)

http://www.qu.org/quis2/Chapter_Site.cfm?Chapter_ID=110&State_ID=0 (http://www.qu.org/quis2/Chapter_Site.cfm?Chapter_ID=110&State_ID=0)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Rastus on June 09, 2008, 09:41:52 PM
..............But I was actually referring to birds..  like quail..and prairie chicken is about nil. .. and our rabbit population is very low. ( cause the KF&G put a protection on the stupid hawks..) soooo we have a hawk on every fence post and the rabbit and quail have been their food source. ..........

Interesting observation on the fence posts....jogged my memory.  My dad used to explain to me when he was a child (70-75 years ago) that they used to catch the hawks to keep them from eating the chickens they depended on for food.  They'd get a steel trap, set it on top of a post with a bundle of feathers on it for bait.  Couldn't afford shotgun shells in those days.....
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 10, 2008, 03:51:20 AM
  No Tom 155 howitzer, works great when their dug in.  ;D

When I was in the Guard 89-92 I was Unit Armorer (76Y) for A Btry 3rd/197th FA, We had M-198's
The (Then) new 155's that you did not have to dig breech pits for  ;D
But being a Marine first (and always) I did not think of HOWitzer till after I posted ::)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Big Frank on June 10, 2008, 04:23:19 AM
I can't remember the last time I actually hunted even though I always buy a small game license.
I've never been to any type of organized shooting event. But I buy ammo by the case full.
I like to shoot my guns just because I find it enjoyable. I like to customize them too. It's fun.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 10, 2008, 04:32:03 AM
I can't remember the last time I actually hunted even though I always buy a small game license.
I've never been to any type of organized shooting event. But I buy ammo by the case full.
I like to shoot my guns just because I find it enjoyable. I like to customize them too. It's fun.

I have not got to the customizing yet but it sounds like fun. I got into machining because I thought I'd be able to make my own knives, when my first job out of vocational school was with a gun company I almost messed the FRONT of my pants. Boy, did I have A LOT to learn ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Marshal Halloway on June 10, 2008, 04:51:33 PM

A lot more about this topic on Down Range Radio #62 airing from around 11:00 PM Eastern.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: wisconsin on June 10, 2008, 05:20:00 PM
I see more deer in my neck of the woods driving home at night from work, than I do when I go hunting ??? Its getting to the point that if a moth passes by the window it scares  :o  the s**t out of me. And believe it or not I see more deer,turkey at my clubs range when I'm shooting than out in the woods. I'm begining to think I'm doing something wrong  ??? Or maybe I should just quit hunting all together and shoot more than just once a week.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Teresa Heilevang on June 10, 2008, 06:19:01 PM
oh yea.. we have lots of turkey too. and let me tell you.. they can flat "carry the mail"..
I was on the 4 wheeler the other evening and riding through the pasture and there he was.. strutting around and going in a direction parallel to me.. I kind of hit the gas and tried to outrun him.. but he kept right beside me and then took off and flew and man alive.. could he fly with some speed! :o

How he made it through the trees without crashing into them is beyond me.. but he did.

Ok.. that's all I wanted to say... Just reminded me of it when I read that thread..
bye..  ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Hazcat on June 10, 2008, 06:19:32 PM
A lot more about this topic on Down Range Radio #62 airing from around 11:00 PM Eastern.

Hey Marshal. yer YELLOW...........









shirt in the new avatar looks good.  ;D (http://www.mazeguy.net/happy/rotfl.gif)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: CJS3 on June 10, 2008, 09:28:47 PM
I've been reading the replies for the last couple of days, and the only question I have is, how can you be a hunter without being a shooter first? They kind of go hand in hand, which is why I chose both in the poll. Does it make me any less of a shooter if I don't have more than one AR? How about if I have more than one 30-30? Am I not a hunter because I collect Colts? Did I break the rules because I shot a hog with an AK (it was a damn good shot too)? I'm a gun owner first, then a hunter or shooter ( or shooter or hunter ). These catagories are your limitations, not mine. Any current or proposed gun laws affect me, because I am a Gun Owner first.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Teresa Heilevang on June 10, 2008, 09:52:52 PM
I agree with you.
Around my parts here, we don;'t have many shooters. In fact I would say that 95% are hunters ..and don''t consider themselves shooters.
 But I think that is because we are so small a community and don't have any ranges ( our ranges are our  back yards, cause most live in the country)  so maybe that is why hunters that don't shoot at ranges or shoot competitively do not consider themselves to be shooters, and only hunters..when in fact if you are hunting you hopefully are shooting..so they have to be a shooter to be a hunter ..but they don't have to be a hunter to be a shooter.
 .................................. :-\
(My gosh.. did I really say all of that without taking a breath?)  :o and did anyone actually understand a damned word I said?

We call people that do not set in a stand or a turkey blind "shooters" cause they just drive around and when they see game they jump out and shoot at it. That to me is NOT hunting.
But I do think that hunting is not as prevailant as it was..say 10 years ago.. Lots of changes have put the kinks to it.
 I do think that shooting for fun and competitively is becoming more popular than ever before. 
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Marshal Halloway on June 10, 2008, 10:05:56 PM
But I think that is because we are so small a community and don't have any ranges ( our ranges are our  back yards, cause most live in the country)  so maybe that is why hunters that don't shoot at ranges or shoot competitively do not consider themselves to be shooters, and only hunters..when in fact if you are hunting you hopefully are shooting..so they have to be a shooter to be a hunter ..but they don't have to be a hunter to be a shooter.
 .................................. :-\
(My gosh.. did I really say all of that without taking a breath?)  :o and did anyone actually understand a damned word I said?

Wow, that sounds exactly like Festus Hagen talking to Doc Adams in Gunsmoke. Maybe I should call you Festus'ette...  ;D

Seriously, in these neck of the woods, there is no categorized gun culture. It is "the" culture, period. Reason is that guns here are looked at as tools. Besides from skeet and trap, there are no environment for competitive shooting. Recreational shooting, yes, but as a part of a social gathering on private property. I don't think the majority here consider themselves either a hunter or a shooter. If you ask someone that question, most of them would look at you and say huh??
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Marshal Halloway on June 10, 2008, 10:07:46 PM

Btw,

Here's Michael's more detailed take on this topic:
http://www.downrange.tv/radio/63.htm
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 11, 2008, 02:46:14 AM
The people I was thinking of as "Hunters" are the ones who put their rifle (Or what ever) in the same catagory as their calls,scents etc. Hunting gear. The ones I think of as shooters are the ones who get a gun they want and then decide if or where they can apply it besides the range, as in gee, I wander how this AK will do on Boar or deer?
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Ron J on June 11, 2008, 04:44:01 AM
"how this AK will do on Boar or deer?"

To very loosely quote Shakespeare's Juliet ...

O, be some other name!
      What's in a name? that which we call a gun
      By any other name would shoot as sweet;
      So Kalashnikov would, were he not Kalashnikov call'd,
      Retain that deer perfection which he owes
      Without that title. Kalashnikov, doff thy name,
      And for that name which is now part of thee
      Take to the range.

Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Hazcat on June 11, 2008, 05:55:34 AM
"how this AK will do on Boar or deer?"

To very loosely quote Shakespeare's Juliet ...

O, be some other name!
      What's in a name? that which we call a gun
      By any other name would shoot as sweet;
      So Kalashnikov would, were he not Kalashnikov call'd,
      Retain that deer perfection which he owes
      Without that title. Kalashnikov, doff thy name,
      And for that name which is now part of thee
      Take to the range.



Nicely done!!  I do believe you just raised the boards' IQ average several points! ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 11, 2008, 11:00:43 AM
Now that I've had some sleep let me try this again  ;D The people I classed as Hunters are the ones who want to make the "Kill" regardless of Weapon,  Shooters are those who want to make the "Shot" regardless of target.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: ericire12 on June 11, 2008, 03:17:54 PM
Now that I've had some sleep let me try this again  ;D The people I classed as Hunters are the ones who want to make the "Kill" regardless of Weapon,  Shooters are those who want to make the "Shot" regardless of target.

Brilliant!
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: shooter27 on June 11, 2008, 04:28:00 PM
I'll try to get my demagraphics right.

 I shoot rifle more then I shoot pistol or shotgun. Pistol shooting is close second to rifle. Shotgun is distant third. I've hunted with my shotgun and enjoyed it! But I don't hunt with my rifle, just target shoot.(NRA Highpower) I don't plink with a pistol, (just combat) but no bulleye target. I have shot bullseye, but combat is more fun. I've shot trap and tought it for the local club to jr's but I don't call myself a shotgunner. I 'm the president of the local club , but I still have a home and job to run.

 So, what demagraphic do I belong to ?   :-\
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: 2HOW on June 11, 2008, 05:19:35 PM
When I was in the Guard 89-92 I was Unit Armorer (76Y) for A Btry 3rd/197th FA, We had M-198's
The (Then) new 155's that you did not have to dig breech pits for  ;D
But being a Marine first (and always) I did not think of HOWitzer till after I posted ::)
  Shot em all the 155 the 8" and 102,  loved to ride my 155, those were the long tubes rollin over Sadams boys.  Read 'Into the Storm" great book .
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: jerry on June 11, 2008, 07:30:34 PM
Ms M, you hit the nail on the head about the birds.  A buddy of mine and I were just talking the other day about quail.  I haven't seen a covey of quail in a very long time.  I see a couple every now and then but no covies.  I travel all over southwest Florida, and it's like this all over.  Hopefully one of these days, we will see them again like we used to.

As far as the turkeys, they're everywhere.  A couple of months back, I had ridden up toward Weirdsdale, and one was crossing Hwy. 301 at Hwy 42.  I mean, it was walking through the intersection.  She didn't seem to mind the traffic any at all.  Hogs are taking over and the deer population is steadily growing around here also. 
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: CJS3 on June 11, 2008, 07:50:09 PM
In Texas, what Quail or Prairie Chickens we used to have got cleaned out by the fire ants. They just love ground nesting birds eggs.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: wisconsin on June 11, 2008, 08:18:19 PM
Now that I've had some sleep let me try this again  ;D The people I classed as Hunters are the ones who want to make the "Kill" regardless of Weapon,  Shooters are those who want to make the "Shot" regardless of target.
That is a very good way of putting it.
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 12, 2008, 02:11:16 AM
I'll try to get my demagraphics right.

 I shoot rifle more then I shoot pistol or shotgun. Pistol shooting is close second to rifle. Shotgun is distant third. I've hunted with my shotgun and enjoyed it! But I don't hunt with my rifle, just target shoot.(NRA Highpower) I don't plink with a pistol, (just combat) but no bulleye target. I have shot bullseye, but combat is more fun. I've shot trap and tought it for the local club to jr's but I don't call myself a shotgunner. I 'm the president of the local club , but I still have a home and job to run.

 So, what demagraphic do I belong to ?   :-\

According to the latest Shooting wire you pretty much resonify the shooting community   ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: tombogan03884 on June 12, 2008, 02:12:59 AM
  Shot em all the 155 the 8" and 102,  loved to ride my 155, those were the long tubes rollin over Sadams boys.  Read 'Into the Storm" great book .


Read it. I take it you were SP. We were towed. We don't care what the music is, as long as it's LOUD   ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Hazcat on June 12, 2008, 06:11:04 AM


Read it. I take it you were SP. We were towed. We don't care what the music is, as long as it's LOUD   ;D


AWWWW, look at the cute little gun bunnies!  ;D
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: Walter45Auto on June 25, 2008, 02:00:39 PM
I do both, but don't get to hunt very much. 8)
Title: Re: Hunters Vs. Shooters
Post by: pgrass101 on June 26, 2008, 09:04:42 AM
Well my Deer rrifle is my FAL was a DSA scope mount and a 5 round mag